Looking at those three ladies, a few hankies in strategic places would probably be advisable. I tried to post earlier on this thread but it wouldn't work. What I wanted to say was the black face mask has powdered carbon in it 'to remove clogged pores', so that's why the face is blacked up. (I do hope it doesn't actually remove pores!)

There are people who plaster what looks like pigshit all over their faces then stick a lump of cucumber over each eye. I mean, what's all that about? I reckon the women who do that should just go the whole hog and mud-wrestle in skimpy t-shirts and knickers. But let's not go there.

wellll.. It's slap bang at the top of today's Amazon deals of the the day...

couldn't miss it...

That's the point.. from conception to publishing, how many people would have passed this imagery for mainstream consumption without even realising...???

By the end of today, it might be interesting to see if any comments in the user feedback, if the item is still so prominently displayed...???

Remember, in perspective..this will be on display to more than hundreds of thousands of people,, the 'problematic' morris side would be lucky if their 'war paint' is seen by more than a few tens at any one performance...

pfr sez - I must join a church or a border morris side to learn how to be offended.

Oh no - don't become one of those decent people, I wouldn't recommend it at all, really. What I would recommend would be to come to the United States. You'd love it. I understand your family obligation wouldn't permit it tho, (I cared for my mom & dad for 20 years, the last 12 were 24/7 365).

Take care & and thanks for the huge laff, (i loved being called sanctimonious, had tears rolling down my cheeks, literally).

As I said, an objective discussion about this has to exclude the concept of "being offended." There's an article in this week's Bude and Stratton Post about a chap who was taking his dog and two little daughters for a walk in a local wood. They came across two fellows who were, er, engaged in a rapturous embrace, shall we say, and not entirely clothed at that. Should he have: Taken offence and called the police? Taken offence and shut up (that's the British way, you know!) Taken offence and ranted and raved at the men? Had a quiet giggle and discreetly shepherded his kids out of sight? He could have explained the situation to them later... Got indignant with his daughters over their ignorance of the traditions of homosexual behaviour (remind you of any comments in this thread...)?

And would he have worried as much had it been a boy and a girl? Hmm...

In my view there's one correct answer in that lot....

I agree with you about not lumping all black people together. We shouldn't really be lumping any people together. As for measuring how bad racist activities against black peoples are by seeing how many black people are offended, it's probably worth remembering that some black people call other black people niggers. Does anyone here think that that mitigates or excuses the horridness of calling black people niggers?

By the way, yer man in the wood responded to what he saw by...putting the story on Facebook. 😂😂😂

I think there are both cultural equity (http://www.culturalequity.org/ace/ce_ace_about_ce.php) and cultural appropration (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_appropriation) angles on this.

That the first gets respect and the second caution and/or disdain in the 'above the line' discussions here are part of what makes them a great resource.

I think that aspects of both are getting stirred into a incoherent mud in this discussion.

One thing that strikes me is that minstrel shows, and UK TV's 'Black and White Minstrel Show' in particular, included both and appropriation and lack of respect for a culture - that of African Americans. In the UK most black people are of Afro-Caribbean or African extraction. Are they offended by black-face and how much attention did they pay to the B&W Minstrel Show?

Good point, pfr. It's not the most apocalyptic race issue ever to hit the planet. My personal feelings about blacking up are definitely on the mild side. I just find it very odd that some or all (who knows, he didn't really say...) of us whiteys can be accused of taking offence "on behalf of" black people. Doesn't chime with me at all and I feel that it didn't need to be said. Maybe it says something about the person who said it, or maybe not...

This is a topic in which we either let the thread go haywire or else we express ourselves clearly and carefully, which I've tried to do. I don't play games and I don't take against people. So far, you've accused me, quite likely, at least if not me my ilk, of taking offence on behalf of black people and of playing games. Do keep piling on tbe insults. You'll be doing my work for me.

If I seem to have misunderstood, Morris-ey, then I suggest you're not making yourself clear. I'll come clean. My OPINION is that Morris dancers should not black up. Now do you think that I am taking offence on behalf of black people? That's what you said about people like me. If English is YOUR first language, you may choose to clarify, carefully I suggest. As I said, people with the same opinion as mine may simply be taking a view (not "taking offence") based on what we know of the practice, the history of the practice and of modern-day sensibilities. The sentence of yours I took issue with is extremely unwelcome to people like me, who may find the attitude conveyed by it to be insulting.

logically that means its ok for border morris dancers to wear black masks, but not black on their faces

They are not wearing masks though are they, Dick? We have no idea if anyone would take offense at them wearing black masks because they do not do it. The point is that anything done, even if done with the most innocent of intentions, can cause offense and, if it can it most likely will at some point. No one is saying don't do it. Just be aware of the possible repercussions. Like anything really!

Is English your first language? I ask because you seem to have misunderstood. What you have quoted is a linguistic device which suggests that because some black people are not offended does not mean that all black people are not offended. It also suggests that some white people assume offence on behalf of others and I doubt you can disagree with the truth of that.

Where you infer a "blanket and unqualified characterisation" is in your mind not in my comment. I accept absolutely that many people will not be offended by Blackface Border, I am not offended, but many might well be and it is something that such Border teams would be well advised to consider.

More generally, I am not big on this causing offence thing. People take offence as they will. Somethings offend me that are not even against any law and even if they were, I would not pursue it.

Blacking-up, making morris morish moorish since 1790. Brought to you by the wonderful folks of England, oh wait, that's right they decided to rediscover their pagan roots and changed it to Britain, darn it I meant to say Great Britain, opps, sorry, they changed it again, United Kingdom (so confusing to me, I'm American).

"For every black person who is not offended, there is one that is and probably twice that number of white people taking offence on behalf of black people."

You are accusing white people of taking offence on behalf of black people, in other words going all sanctimonious and politically-correct, patronising even. Well I think it's perfectly valid for white people to make measured objections to blacking up without risking being accused of taking offence on behalf of black people. I regard your blanket and unqualified characterisation of white objectors as unfair. I was saying that plenty of people,black or white, may object to the practice of blacking up without actually taking offence, instead taking a reasoned and objective stance. You weren't allowing for that.

Ah! The Jumbee or Gumbee tradition in the Caribbean is basically Nigerian in origin. But these type of presentations are found in many W African countries. The Baule (one of the Ivory Coast peoples) have a tall character on stilts with a white face mask, representing an evil being. It's very interesting to me to trace the cultures of the slave ancestors of the present-day Caribbean islands. And it's touching that those poor souls tried to keep alive their culture and language in spite of all they'd suffered. I can't see the difference between face-painting and face-masks to be honest. It's obviously merely an attempt at role-changing and disguise, which is as old as humankind itself. I don't think racial parody is involved, just 'theatre' and a bit of mystery.

This thread is developing into such an interesting exploration isn't it? Mudcat at its best!

Well, Morris-ey, I'd venture to suggest that this is not a discussion between people who are offended vs not offended. There are plenty of people who may come out against blacking up whilst not actually feeling offended by it. It's about having a rational, measured discussion that should be as objective as possible.

That blackface minstrelsy had some influence some influence on border morris is beyond doubt. The words in the final part of the Broseley Morris Tune collected by E. C. Cawte from Annie Lloyd make this clear(Cawte, The morris dance in Herefordshire, Shropshire and Worcestershire, p. 201):

There was a little nigger, and he grew no bigger so they put him in the Wild West Show. He tumbled through the window and he broke his little finger, And he couldn't play the old banjo.

The oral testimony from original border morris dancers collected by Gordon Ashman and published in his article Custom in Conflict confirms the influence of minstrelsy. The only question is how big an influence it was.

Guest Pariah, that's a very interesting point. My husband's region of origin has a certain population of white people (mostly French) but they are relatively well-off and live in the wealthy areas of the city. From his accounts they rather despise the black people they once colonised, but there is no overt racism. He has had (as you suggest) no experience of Western racist expression. And has had no racism directed at him in all the years he's lived here in UK, I'm happy to say. But if the Border Morris folk had an ounce of racist feeling in them, they'd hardly invite him to dance with them, grab him for photos and recognise him from one event to another like a long-lost friend. I realise that this might be due to a rather patronising attitude, but I very much doubt it. However, I see your point that a British-born black person might feel very differently. I don't know any, as our area is devoid of any black residents. They might find the sight of a blacked-up dancer evokes memories of minstrels, unkind parody and so on. I'm afraid I can't say. But if so, wouldn't they stridently object to it nationally, in large numbers, and lobby the authorities to ban it?

For every black person who is not offended, there is one that is and probably twice that number of white people taking offence on behalf of black people.

I don't think blackface Border has anything to do with Minstrelsy, which a few here seem to hang everything on, nor do I think those that apply Blackface are inherently or actually racist. Nor do I think that the huge number of Border sides have any clue as to the history of Blackface beyond the advent of the Shropshire Bedlams in 1975 - a side that has moved on from Blackface.

However, if you perform in multi-cultural Britain blacked-up you need to be aware of cultural sensibilities and sensitivities. You might not care about that but others might not care about your "tradition".

E. C. Cawte made a comprehensive listing of accounts of border morris in his article "The morris dance in Herefordshire, Shropshire and Worcestershire". The earliest reference to morris is from 1584, the earliest account of dancing dates from the early 17th century, the first mention of black faces is from the 1870s (see the commentary in the Morris Ring's survey of literature on blacking up for confirmation of this: www.themorrisring.org/sites/default/files/attachments/Blacking%20up--a%20literature%20survey--Strudwick.pdf). Older than many of us but not quite as ancient as some people seem to believe.

Senoufou, do you think its possible that your husband, growing up as he did in Africa and not subjected to discrimination because of his color, not having experience of the racism prevalent in the western world - the minstrel shows, blacked-up white actors on stage, in movies and on early television, "ni**er jokes", lynching, Jim Crow, race riots and all the rest - is not offended whilst persons who HAVE experienced this sort of thing and/or are at least aware of it ARE offended?- be they "black", "yellow" or "brown"?